Toward the end of his life, the Chevalier de Seingalt (1725−1798) wrote a long memoir recounting his
life and adventures. The Chevalier was a somewhat controversial figure, but since he met many famous
people, including kings and writers, his memoir has become a valuable historical source about European
society in the eighteenth century. However, some critics have raised doubts about the accuracy of the
memoir. They claim that the Chevalier distorted or invented many events in the memoir to make his life
seem more exciting and glamorous than it really was.
For example, in his memoir the Chevalier claims that while living in Switzerland, he was very wealthy, and
it is known that he spent a great deal of money there on parties and gambling. However, evidence has
recently surfaced that the Chevalier borrowed considerable sums of money from a Swiss merchant. Critics
thus argue that if the Chevalier had really been very rich, he would not have needed to borrow money.
Critics are also skeptical about the accuracy of the conversations that the Chevalier records in the memoir
between himself and the famous writer Voltaire. No one doubts that the Chevalier and Voltaire met and
conversed. However, critics complain that the memoir cannot possibly capture these conversations
accurately, because it was written many years after the conversations occurred. Critics point out that it is
impossible to remember exact phrases from extended conversations held many years earlier.
Critics have also questioned the memoir’s account of the Chevalier’s escape from a notorious prison in
Venice, Italy. He claims to have escaped the Venetian prison by using a piece of metal to make a hole in
the ceiling and climbing through the roof. Critics claim that while such a daring escape makes for enjoyable
reading, it is more likely that the Chevalier’s jailers were bribed to free him. They point out that the Chevalier
had a number of politically well-connected friends in Venice who could have offered a bribe.
The article discusses an interesting topic pertaining to the memoir of Chevalier de Seingalt and provides 3 reasons of disagreement. However, the professor explains that the memoir of Chevalier was reliable and accurate completely and refutes each of the author’s reasons.
First, the reading passage discusses that Chevalier took money from a merchant while being very wealthy and hence he was poor. However, the professor explains that he had enormous properties in Switzerland and it takes time to liquidate tangible assets. So he has to borrow money from a merchant. Clearly a disparity exists between the article and the evidence exhibited by the professor.
Second, the article says that the recorded conversation cannot be accurate as the actual conversations with famous writer Voltaire has happened long back. In contrast, the professor explains that the other people in connect with Chevalier asserts that he had kept taking notes at every night of conversation with Voltaire.
Finally, the article posits that the escaping from prison is fake and it might have bribe the jailer in Venice. However, the professor refutes this point by explaining that it was not possible to bribe as other prisoners were more powerful than Chevalier. Moreover, the Venice government repaired the ceiling of prison from where he had escape.
In summary, while both the article and classroom discussion provides interesting information on the memoir of Chevalier, a stronger evidence support that professor’s arguments clearly overcomes articles’s claim toward Chevalier memoir’s.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 85, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'bribed'.
Suggestion: bribed
...g from prison is fake and it might have bribe the jailer in Venice. However, the prof...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, hence, however, moreover, second, so, while, as to, in contrast, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1366.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 242.0 270.72406181 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.64462809917 5.08290768461 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94415379849 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00108124312 2.5805825403 116% => OK
Unique words: 141.0 145.348785872 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.582644628099 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 419.4 419.366225166 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.8182570584 49.2860985944 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.833333333 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1666666667 21.698381199 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.58333333333 7.06452816374 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.150093321298 0.272083759551 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0563044124577 0.0996497079465 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0515305327044 0.0662205650399 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0915252998549 0.162205337803 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.060614402009 0.0443174109184 137% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.3589403974 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 53.8541721854 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.43 12.2367328918 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.39 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.